Howland Reed?

User avatar
Raeslewolhn
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:16 am

Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:31 pm

evenwind wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 3:07 pm
Wimsey wrote:
Sat Jul 29, 2017 9:39 pm
Besides, given how much of Daenerys we've seen, there's not much space to put that birthmark.
Her feet! We've never seen a close-up of her feet! Maybe Dany and Jon (and Tyrion and Meera?) have "Targaryan Toe"? :o
Grandmaester Flash wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 10:36 am
As an eye witness, he knows that Ned brought a baby away from the Tower of Joy, and that the baby was Lyanna's.
It was obvious from the circumstances whose baby it was.
And as you go on to say, Ned may have confided more details to him.
It may seem obvious but it's not proof. For all we actually know, Arthur Dayne is Jon's father. But, assuming Jon's father is actually Rhaegar, they really should make it incontrovertable and not just heresay - not only for the viewers but for the characters.
This video puts all the visual evidence together. R and L are his parents.
https://youtu.be/3xaspBsfgRg

I'm usually hesitant to speak definitively, but I believe this is incontrovertible at this point. Also, the ITEs for S6 include thr Ds discussing how their educated guess of who Jon's parents are is how they passed GRRMz test for getting the rights.

...The Bran choice to go to the Reeds makes the most sense for introducing Howland. Maybe we'll see him bc he has an item, like the sword Dawn, to give to Bran or whoever. But info wise, Bran has everything he needs.

I don't think we need proof of Jon being the heir necessarily, he just became king as a bastard. But it could be useful in future plots. Bran needs only prove his validity as a definitive source, and then he becomes proof of anything.

P.S. humans believe the News and Bran is def more reliable lol. Plus, Westeros basically functions in word of mouth and inductive reasoning.

User avatar
evenwind
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:07 pm

Sun Jul 30, 2017 4:23 pm

I've got no doubt that R+L=J. I just hated the way that D&D handled Jon's resurrection, abandoning his Oath by leaving the wall, and showing up with his Wildling army at Winterfell. The viewers know that it was all legit but the Northerners, who supposedly live in a society where honor is paramount, don't seem to care. The very first show saw Nedd killing a Ranger for leaving his post and now ignores the Lord Commander leaving his. Unless, of course, the North actually knows about the resurrection. But you'd think that would important enough for at least one line of dialog.

To me, the writing didn't cover the ground and I hope they don't make a similar mistake when the big R+L=J reveal happens.

User avatar
Raeslewolhn
Posts: 138
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:16 am

Sun Jul 30, 2017 4:29 pm

evenwind wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 4:23 pm
I've got no doubt that R+L=J. I just hated the way that D&D handled Jon's resurrection, abandoning his Oath by leaving the wall, and showing up with his Wildling army at Winterfell. The viewers know that it was all legit but the Northerners, who supposedly live in a society where honor is paramount, don't seem to care. The very first show saw Nedd killing a Ranger for leaving his post and now ignores the Lord Commander leaving his. Unless, of course, the North actually knows about the resurrection. But you'd think that would important enough for at least one line of dialog.

To me, the writing didn't cover the ground and I hope they don't make a similar mistake when the big R+L=J reveal happens.
I 100% agree that his resurrection should have been addressed on dialogue. Or if that look Sansa gives him when he says 'living North' means it's not open knowledge then its problematic for his honor.

But also, just speculating (and this still doesn't excuse the lack of addressing it), can't the Lord commander release someone from their vows? Or is that only normal Lord's and oathes (or the LC could leave as soon as they become LC)

Even if he was still LC, with the LN coming the NW could make a reasonable stance that they need Winterfell and the whole North together,so Sansa is taking Winterfell and the LC (Jon) and NW are helping, but that's not the way they had it play out.

User avatar
Grandmaester Flash
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2017 2:54 pm
Location: England

Sun Jul 30, 2017 6:36 pm

No oaths have been broken by Jon's leaving the Wall.
We have seen brothers of the NW leave the Wall before now to carry out missions, such as recruiting (Yoren, Benjen). The Night's Watch is not what it was, being severely depleted, and needs the backing of the united North.
None of this need involve an account of death and resurrection.

User avatar
Wimsey
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 12:11 pm

Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:48 pm

Grandmaester Flash wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 10:36 am
As an eye witness, he knows that Ned brought a baby away from the Tower of Joy, and that the baby was Lyanna's.
It was obvious from the circumstances whose baby it was.
And as you go on to say, Ned may have confided more details to him.
An eye-witness account is only corroboration. He might be lying or he might be mistaken. People who do not want the story will (as they always do) certainly latch on to those possibilities.

And, as we know: there are people who will insist that legal documents like birth-certificates are forged if it suits their fantasies! :D
"If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise, don't put it there."
A. P. Chehkov

User avatar
Wimsey
Posts: 77
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 12:11 pm

Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:57 pm

Grandmaester Flash wrote:
Sun Jul 30, 2017 6:36 pm
No oaths have been broken by Jon's leaving the Wall.
We have seen brothers of the NW leave the Wall before now to carry out missions, such as recruiting (Yoren, Benjen). The Night's Watch is not what it was, being severely depleted, and needs the backing of the united North.
If this were true, then there is no such thing as desertion. Yoren and Benjen were Away With Leave. Jon is Away Without Leave. AWOL soldiers in our world are effectively wanted men. When soldiers are given permission to go home or for shore leave, then it is fine for them to leave their posts. It is a crime for them to do so otherwise: the crime of desertion.

Jon up and quit, but here's the rub: you cannot quit the Night's Watch. Perhaps a King could release you from your vows or something, but if you do not have orders or permission from the Lord Commander to be away from the Wall, then a NW member is breaking his oath by leaving. On the other hand, Mormont sent Benjen, Yoren and Thorne south: they would have been being insubordinate if they had not gone!
"If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise, don't put it there."
A. P. Chehkov

User avatar
Not Littlefinger
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2017 5:24 pm
Location: Ohio

Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:36 pm

Wimsey wrote:
Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:57 pm
Jon up and quit, but here's the rub: you cannot quit the Night's Watch. Perhaps a King could release you from your vows or something, but if you do not have orders or permission from the Lord Commander to be away from the Wall, then a NW member is breaking his oath by leaving. On the other hand, Mormont sent Benjen, Yoren and Thorne south: they would have been being insubordinate if they had not gone!
I thought that, because the vows are until death (not the "end of time" or "the last day,") Jon was technically relieved of his duties, because he died.

User avatar
evenwind
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 2:07 pm

Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:48 pm

Not Littlefinger wrote:
Tue Aug 01, 2017 6:36 pm
I thought that, because the vows are until death (not the "end of time" or "the last day,") Jon was technically relieved of his duties, because he died.
Right. We the viewers know that. But unless the North is aware of his resurrection, they've got to think he's an oathbreaker, which is a very bad thing in their culture. And the way it's been written, they don't seem to care.

Dennai
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 7:33 am

Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:52 pm

Wimsey wrote:
Fri Jul 28, 2017 10:04 pm

As for Bran, he can convince them easily enough: after all, he is now going to be able to tell other Northerners things about themselves that Bran has no business knowing. If Bran is not pressing any claim (which would be his most obvious selfish reason for fabricating this story), then why would he lie about this after telling Lord Glover what he'd been doing with servant girl or Lord Manderly what he'd been doing with the... well, let's not go there!
Hey! I really want to know what he was doing with the eels. That's what you are talking about, right? Because I always associated Manderly with eels. You can't pull a Tyrion's honeycomb and leave us in the dark, wanting, anticipating... It's not fair! :evil:

User avatar
Grandmaester Flash
Posts: 76
Joined: Tue Jul 04, 2017 2:54 pm
Location: England

Tue Aug 01, 2017 9:04 pm

Wimsey wrote:
Tue Aug 01, 2017 4:57 pm
Jon up and quit, but here's the rub: you cannot quit the Night's Watch. Perhaps a King could release you from your vows or something, but if you do not have orders or permission from the Lord Commander to be away from the Wall, then a NW member is breaking his oath by leaving. On the other hand, Mormont sent Benjen, Yoren and Thorne south: they would have been being insubordinate if they had not gone!
As the Lord Commander, he gave himself permission! 8-)

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests